Why is Gary Johnson not the best candidate?

I'm not a proponent of a $15 (federal) minimum wage, but this was a pretty batty argument against it, IMO:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pQe_48ALjLQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Also not a fan of his foreign policy. I believe intervention is necessary at times.

If you're not an ultra-small government fiscal conservative, I don't see what Johnson really offers other than someone who isn't Clinton or Trump. I'm fine with HRC.

 

I see that as a solid argument on his part and a lot of naivete on the part of the woman giving the interview. Thinking that Taco Bell or Burger King would just decide to eat those losses with a minimum wage increase is pretty hilarious. It would certainly lead to a mix of automation eliminating jobs and an increase in prices. The notion that minimum wage increases lead to more buying power in all but the short term is kind of funny.

I mean, that's really the problem isn't it? When people see the same issues so differently, it's hard to find middle ground.

 

I'm voting for him

 

"Let the market decide" is an insane argument for the average person. The market will find the lowest possible wage that can attract employees. Quality of life suffers.

Case in point: college faculty. The trend is all toward "letting the market decide" by using part-time faculty instead of full-time faculty, because the jobs still get filled. Saves a lot of money for the school! Don't have to pay benefits to part-timers either. Meanwhile, faculty can barely survive. If faculty service quality suffers using part-timers, doesn't really matter: what, are the students gonna 1) know the difference? 2) tell their mommies? Then what? Their mommies transfer them to a different university? No, quality of the product goes down for the consumers (students and parents), quality of life for the employees goes down, and the only ones who benefit are the top-tier administrators and the institution as a whole in a financial--not educational--sense. Meanwhile, college education fees are going up and up! You'd think they'd be going down, since "the market" is driving salaries into a nose dive.

 

Seriously why.

I get the legaluze it/live and let live thing.

But libertarian economics are basically like the absolute worst possible outcome to our present status overall, and completely tone deaf to the Trump/Sanders economic populism strain.

I would call the "low taxes and deregulate everything " a Kochligarch wet dream, but there is not enough motile semen in their shriveled old testes to remotely convey that sentiment accurately.

 

Because his policies are libertarian and resemble 19th century America. We'd like to live in the 21st century.

 

This is nonsense.

He is not the most qualified man to be president.

His policies are all over the place and so is his party.

And you basically admitted you only want to vote for him to be a contrarian because the idea of a Madam President upsets you

 

TARP was a specific vote back in 2008 to prevent the world's financial system from failing and leading to a global depression. Clinton voted for it - as did many other Dems and GOPers. Those that didn't - on both sides - should not be in office. Period.

She can say all she wants that she would allow banks to fail today - but (a) the system is very different post-FinReg and the consequences are reduced (no one knows by how much) and (b) if a bank failing would cause the world to end, I'm pretty certain she would vote to stop it.

Trump is not qualified in any respect to be President, so his TARP position is sort of irrelevant.

This is a bit of a summary of where we were in September 2008:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/2/9/695504/-

http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/2009/02/how-world-almost-came-to-end-at-2pm-on.html

Everyone in Congress was briefed, if not on the specifics, then on the general place we were at and the need for TARP. It wasn't guaranteed to work, but you had 3 alternatives:

No TARP: World ends.
TARP fails: World ends.
TARP succeeds: World does not end.

The vote was an absolute 100% no-brainer (or, if not TARP, then a similar alternative - but the opponents weren't proposing an alternative).

 

People who, today, still argue against the 2008 TARP are my issue in this case. Candidates can say what they want about a future bailout - everyone wants to oppose that in theory. But the people that are arguing that the 2008 TARP was bad, despite the benefit of hindsight and seeing that it cost nothing and saved the global economy are just pure ignorant on the point of governance - it's governing on theoretical principle with no concern for the actual real-world consequences of the people or country you are elected to lead.

 

He has no chance of winning. Anyone who votes for him is throwing their vote away. Plus he is pro baby murdering. Now if Ron Paul were running on the Libertarian ticket it might be interesting.

 

yea the food stamp system is horrible

anyways he wanted to implement this as governor, as president he believes education is a states issue so wouldn't try to implement nationally.

Most those nations have less people and ****tier healthcare...

those places would be the exact opposite of libertarianism. they are dictated by massive amounts of force. Hong Kong would be a better answer.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...use-of-the-Filibuster-Not-a-topic-of-the-News

Republicans have shattered past filibuster records with their hold on congress. Yet both sides are to blame for the stalemate?

How can you claim extremity when what used to be the left has gone to the corporate centrists, and the right has gone off the deep end?

 

Because the Libertarian Party is a joke. That is why.

 

Because this POS wants to take away my medications.. Other than that if he changed that one policy. Gary Johnson for President!!!!

 

I would not vote for him base solely on many of his and the Libertarian Party positions already listed. And while I understand and can sorta appreciate the sense of humor and need for attention that led to this interview, I can't see him as a serious candidate:

[youtube]https://youtu.be/hdkznU2IvfU[/youtube]

 

He'd need to be about 20 years younger.

And he'd have no chance of getting enough votes. He's as libertarian as it gets for a politician, and that's not very popular with American voters. Peace + individual liberty? Hell no! Give me a well-run penitentiary please.

 

Lets take the population of germany, france, UK, canada, and japan and you have a population the size of the US. They spend less money on healthcare and are ranked above us. Other than Japan they also take in many immigrants.

http://thepatientfactor.com/canadia...zations-ranking-of-the-worlds-health-systems/

Next you are going to say the rankings are flawed. By what measure would you say the US healthcare system is better than the ones I listed? People live longer in those countries than here.

 

because Presidentin' is serious business 24/7/365, you can't have an ounce of silly in you

 

This is one of the saddest comments I hear made. When someone makes this comment, all I hear is 'The two party system is whats best for this country'. If this is what you believe, I respect that.

Sans an assassination, arrest or something completely out of the blue, showing up to vote for the POTUS is a complete waste of time. If one is to pointlessly vote for the 'less of two evils', why not vote against both evils?

Most states are going to vote Red or Blue, therefore those states votes hold very little power. The point of voting 3rd party is to continue to build support and show that the people will accept something beyond a duopoly. The goal is not to win the presidency, but to increase 3rd party power in congress.

A two man race offers no competition.

 

that's why I'm hoping he makes the debates. To show the country that there are other options.

Is he going to win? Hell no. But if the GOP sees him finish the election with a decent percentage among groups they struggle with it may get them to consider shifting some of their terrible social stances... Which is the reason millennials and minorities won't vote for Repubs.

And to the posters shooting him down because "libertarians are crazy", it's funny because quite a bit of the libertarian base is attacking him because he's not crazy enough.